Report: At-risk students need more Michigan funding

Michigan needs to address a school funding system that is becoming increasingly unequal and spend more to educate children who are at risk or speak little or no English.

Those are some of the key conclusions in a critical report released today on school funding by a firm that spent eight months studying how much money Michigan schools need in order for students to meet the state's tough graduation requirements.

"The results ... show that there was significantly more variation in per-pupil revenues and expenditures across districts than is desirable for an equitable school finance system," the report said.

The maximum per-pupil amount in Michigan next school year will range from $7,511 to $8,229. But some districts spend considerably more.

The researchers said an optimal spending level for Michigan schools is $8,667 per pupil, based on the spending levels of 54 school districts identified as "notably successful."

• Nancy Kaffer: Could CEOs be new fix for failing Michigan schools?

That likely will lead to calls for increases in school spending, though the report doesn't specifically call for an overall spending increase for schools. Some education groups said the report's findings indicate Michigan is underfunding schools overall, while other groups cautioned against interpreting the findings as indicating more money will lead to better academic results.

Those 54 districts were deemed successful because their students perform above the state average in all subjects tested, and also excel in other areas, such as strong test score improvement.

The districts, the report said, "represent the best indicator of what it might take for ALL districts to succeed at a base level."

Among the metro Detroit districts on that list: Plymouth-Canton Community Schools, Grosse Pointe Public Schools, Rochester Community Schools and the Clawson School District.

The report also recommends that on top of the $8,667, Michigan spend 30% more per student for at-risk students and 40% more per student for students struggling to learn English — increases described as "substantial," by Mike Addonizio, a professor of education policy at Wayne State University.

It's a recognition that kids don't come to school equally ready to learn, Addonizio said.

"So you do need extra supports and programs and time for the low-income child and the English language learners," Addonizio said.

The study was conducted by Augenblick, Palaich and Associates (APA), the Denver-based firm the state paid $399,000 to conduct the comprehensive analysis.

The analysis, however, excludes charter schools, which get about $1 billion annually in state funding. Also, the researchers said the state needs a better system of tracking special education spending in order to provide an accurate analysis of spending in that area.

Ari Adler, spokesman for Gov. Rick Snyder, said the findings make it clear "that a more equitable funding system is needed and more needs to be done to measure education funding and outcomes."

• Related: CEO for 4 East Detroit schools: I want to get results for kids

Adler said a commission Snyder recently created to look at ways to improve education in Michigan would review the report.

"It will be an important review that takes into account adequate spending as well as high-quality outcomes. It takes more than saying that if we invested X dollars more per student they would all do better, because there are so many factors involved besides dollars spent," Adler said.

The report also noted that while Michigan is already spending 11% more for at-risk students and 24% more for English language learners than it does for students who aren't at-risk or struggling with English, those rates "are far below" what's recommended.

David Arsen, professor of education policy and educational administration at Michigan State University, said the study is an important step for the state.

"Funding has been a pressing issue for Michigan schools for several years," said Arsen, who recently coauthored a study that looked at why Michigan school districts get into financial trouble. "And it's well-known that many districts have been under acute financial pressure. Even districts that are not under acute pressure have been making major changes in their operations for financial reasons."

Ben DeGrow, director of education policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said the report “leaves more questions unanswered,” and more clarity is needed in how the company came to some of its conclusions. One conclusion in particular he found puzzling: That a $1,000 increase in spending per student was associated with a one percent increase in proficiency for math and reading.

“They didn’t really lead us to how they came to that conclusion. That’s a lot more money to spend for very little results,” DeGrow said.

DeGrow said Michigan residents shouldn't jump to the conclusion that increased spending equals better outcomes. He said he found the opposite in a study he released earlier this year.

Whether lawmakers in Michigan do anything about the findings remains to be seen. The 2015 state law that required the study doesn't require the state to take action on its findings.

Arsen said he hopes the study sparks conversations.

"This is a conversation that will be important for framing the future of public education in Michigan," Arsen said.

Mike Griffith, school finance strategist for the Education Commission of the States, a nonpartisan education policy organization, said what happens next will depend on the will of the policymakers.

"I've seen some of these studies be done, and the minute they're finished, they're thrown in a drawer and no one ever looks at it," said Griffith, who also helps conduct education finance studies for the firm Picus Odden & Associates. "I've seen some of these be done and they're used as blueprints and almost copied exactly to change the state funding formula."

Michigan joins more than 30 other states that have commissioned such studies.

A 2014 report prepared for the Maryland Department of Education by APA and Picus Odden found that all but one of the 39 studies conducted at the time in 24 states suggested that more dollars were needed for public education. That analysis looked at studies completed since 2003.

The estimated increases suggested ranged from $144 per pupil in New Jersey in 2006 to more than $5,000 per pupil in Montana in 2007, according to the report.

The studies, Griffith said, are trying to link student achievement to expenditures — something most state Legislatures don't do. Education committees tend to make decisions about what to expect of students while budget committees tend to look at how to fund schools.

"But there's no connection between the two," Griffith said.

"Student expectations tend to be done in education committees of the Legislature. And the expenditures come from the budget committee. The expenditures tend to be based off of what you have available as a state at any given time."

Contact Lori Higgins: 313-222-6651, lhiggins@freepress.com or @LoriAHiggins